Daily chart

United States of Adipose

AMERICA'S elite athletes may have topped the Olympics medal table, but the rest of the country is not in such good shape. The latest annual survey from the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention reveals a state-by-state picture of the nation's battle with the bulge. The survey uses people's self-reported height and weight to determine body mass index: a BMI of 30 or over is considered obese. Outdoorsy Colorado and Hawaii are the slimmest places, but even there, over a fifth of adults—20.7% and 21.8% respectively—are obese. Tipping the scale at the other end are Mississippi and Louisiana, where obese adults make up 34.9% and 33.4% of the population. As the map below shows, these extremes correspond to a general pattern of lean western states and portly southern ones. The District of Columbia and commuter states around New York City are also notable for their relative, possibly wealth-related, thinness. The figures are self-reported, but a national study based on measured height and weight released in February put the national obesity rate even higher, at 36%. This year's survey cannot be compared with previous years' because the methodology has been changed to include households that only use mobile phones, thereby capturing poorer and younger households that lack landlines.

Non-hispanic whites are most obese in the mid-west but the difference is minor. The national range is 20-29%.

Note that non-hispanic blacks are most obese in the south and mid-west and their range is generally 25 in the best case scenario and in most states goes over 35%. This is a huge difference.

Interestingly, if you look at a map of the percentage of black population per state, it is also centered around the south. Hence, the south faces a double whammy of a higher obesity rate among blacks + a higher proportion of black people.

Mississippi and Louisiana have the highest percentage of black people out of all the states in the country - a whopping 37% and 32%. At the same time, 30 states have a 10% or lower black population. This difference is enormous and accounts for the obesity rate map that you see. Out of the blue states, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia also don't do very well and this is because they also have significant black populations and show up in the top 10 states in the country.

Note that Hispanic Americans, especially Mexican Americans, also have high obesity rates which is why Texas does poorly even though it ranks at 18th in terms of the proportion of black Americans.

There are a few outliers, which is why I said that race is not the only factor. But it is a significant factor nonetheless. The same goes for educational attainment maps which liberals on this site love to break down by red/blue state lines however they are also strongly associated with the proportion of minorities (black/non-white hispanic).

Non-hispanic whites are most obese in the mid-west but the difference is minor. The national range is 20-29%.

Note that non-hispanic blacks are most obese in the south and mid-west and their range is generally 25 in the best case scenario and in most states goes over 35%. This is a huge difference.

Interestingly, if you look at a map of the percentage of black population per state, it is also centered around the south. Hence, the south faces a double whammy of a higher obesity rate among blacks + a higher proportion of black people.

Mississippi and Louisiana have the highest percentage of black people out of all the states in the country - a whopping 37% and 32%. At the same time, 30 states have a 10% or lower black population. This difference is enormous and accounts for the obesity rate map that you see. Out of the blue states, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia also don't do very well and this is because they also have significant black populations and show up in the top 10 states in the country.

Note that Hispanic Americans, especially Mexican Americans, also have high obesity rates which is why Texas does poorly even though it ranks at 18th in terms of the proportion of black Americans.

There are a few outliers, which is why I said that race is not the only factor. But it is a significant factor nonetheless. The same goes for educational attainment maps which liberals on this site love to break down by red/blue state lines however they are also strongly associated with the proportion of minorities (black/non-white hispanic).

All this silly debate is moot. The #1 determining factor for health is education. Simple fact, nothing else to discuss.
It has nothing to do if you are from the South or North, anglo, hispanic, black or green....http://www.who.int/hia/evidence/doh/en/

It is heart-rending to see the average American waddle to his/her SUV, wearing bulging clothes over a bloated body and toting grocery bags filled with processed foods comprising high-fructose corn syrup and dairy products.

I stopped driving my car to work (started cycling instead), knocked off my sugar intake by 80% and lost 25 lbs. The feeling is priceless.

The fat people in this country are going to kill us. Paying for their diabetes care and other health problems is going to cost us big. It's almost fashionable to be obese. We're the only country in the world where there are obese poor people. It is endemic in this country.

Although the BMI is only a good measurement when you do not build up muscles by going to the gym for instance, one cannot explain the gap between, say Ivory Coast or even Belgium, and America, with just the fact that the parameter measures wrong things.

There's several factors. First is income. In America, it is cheaper to eat poorly than to eat well. Second is culture (mostly defined by wealth and income level as well). The middle class exercises, plays sports, takes active vacations, eat healthier food, have annual check-ups, worry about health and associate thin with attractive. Blacks, Hispanics, and poor whites do none of the above. Richer blacks and hispanics (there aren't very many) behave more like their income group than their ethnic group, although ethnic traditions do have a secondary effect. Part of the problem in America is that farm subsidies (largely on corn and grains) make high carbohydrate, low nutrition food so cheap. In other rich parts of the world, it is not so cheap to eat a high calorie, low nutrient diet. You can get a lot of calories for your dollar if you buy processed foods made with wheat or corn, corn oil, high fructose corn syrup, and seasonings. Lots of calories and no nutrients lead to fat, sick people. It is useful to wonder what would happen if we directed our grain subsidies to vegetable farmers instead?

A factor often overlooked is US agricultural policy - high protection to domestic sugar producers and the availability of Japanese technology to make high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) led food manufacturers to use the cheaper HFCS. And HFCS is not processed in our bodies in the same way as sugar, and contributes to body weight gain. Of course, corn producers also benefited as they do now from a significant share of their crop going to produce biofuels, due to US energy policy.

The obesity epidemic, particularly among the poor and the gullible, has a simple cause. Addictive food additives. Sugar is highly addictive, with the majority of people in the USA being sugar-addicted. Caffeine, MSG, refined salt and other food additives are all addictive.
This is a deliberate policy by the food manufacturing industries to maximise sales. Many industries (junk food, weight loss, medical)like things just the way they are and are doing all they can to lobby (bribe) against and hide/obfuscate the simple solutions.
See http://www.growyouthful.com/ailment/weight-gain-obesity.php

Yes, but the sample size of the USA and Belgium are vastly off. You would have to compare all of Europe with the USA to get something close to accurate, and I can assure you that there are a lot of fat british and italians at least.

But have you considered that lots more healthy people living longer after retirement are going to be consuming and not producing and increasing pension costs? Moreover, the big health costs invariably come during the last few months of life, however long we live - and dealing with all those damaged ankles, knees and hips from vigorous sport when we were young could cost!

Agree you can be fat and fit. A better indicator of health for an individual is a heart stress test undertaken on a moving belt that speeds up with an increasing gradient. I'm overweight but do pretty good on that test. But there are no statistically valid comparisons of these tests for countries.

I'm not really sure that one can be "fat and fit". I guess it depends on your definition of fat. But people with a BMI over 30 (obese) will have - sooner or later - all sorts of orthopedic problems, knees and legs in particular.

It's simply not in the basic human biological structure to carry this excess weight.